His Excellency Radosław Sikorski

On Transition in Afghanistan: "At the last NATO summit in Lisbon, we agreed to complete the process of transition in Afghanistan by 2014. It makes sense to shift training into higher gear and to support Afghan security, rather than continue to pour far greater resources into our own military presence in that country. Just consider the current price tag, just for U.S. operations: $10 billion per month in Afghanistan. Financing a 240,000 Afghan national security force could cost $4 billion per annum."

On Evolving Global Defense Issues: "Let’s be honest: Afghanistan exemplifies a profound problem for NATO and for all countries looking seriously at global defense problems. These days, threats and hostile weapons are small, elusive, maybe literally invisible. Why should an enemy of this country strive to blow up a military base here in Illinois, when remote hacking can disrupt its operations or create [a] huge breakdown in nearby civilian infrastructure to immobilize it no less effectively? This works both ways. Why send heavy NATO forces into remote areas of Afghanistan to fight terrorists and extremists plotting against us, when remote-controlled military drones can do a ruthless job attacking them as if from a clear sky?"

On Changing ‘National and Collective Defense’ Doctrine:  “'In an interconnected world, an attack on one nation's networks can be an attack on all.' This is what Hillary Clinton said in 2010, in the context of online censorship by China and some other states. Her words also apply to defense. If countries want the benefit of sharing those networks, don’t they have to shoulder a fair part of the responsibility to protect them? And what if they don’t, or can’t, or won’t defend them against attacks from within their own borders? Whether we like it or not, long established doctrines of “national and collective defense” have to change. New technology creates new possibilities for highly focused military action—and completely new moral and legal questions."

On ‘Pooling and Sharing’ Resources: "The European Union is looking at a new “pooling and sharing” approach to generating capabilities. Some countries find this is hard to accept—what about sovereignty? The answer to that is that you have only what you can pay for. When times are hard it makes sense to share. For most countries, in defense terms this means strengthening niche specializations or investing in military systems where they enjoy a comparative advantage."

On Russia and Missile Defense: "In many policy areas, the key to keeping European security in good shape means engaging creatively but honestly with Russia. Issues around missile defense and the possibility of other former Soviet republics joining NATO have been rumbling on for a long time now. Protection against ballistic missiles is part of our collective defense and cannot be outsourced to a third-party. [...] Poland wants NATO to work closely with Russia on how to revive a comprehensive arms control regime in Europe, fostering transparency, openness and predictability. The NATO-Russia Council should engage on those difficult areas where we disagree."